Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 09 September 2019 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE10120048; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 13:40:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ah2W2_y0ldtt; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 13:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52e.google.com (mail-pg1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DC77120020; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 13:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id u17so8505701pgi.6; Mon, 09 Sep 2019 13:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=svfQ7HzkgP4B6UmFmV8pZXEtOn+P+bd+5mbd7e7zoBg=; b=TMDd1Rg10waCECenT3I/Tx39b2+tNNwdoGeHMJ7lV6VaGQOwxcABY0Jj9Btdx5K71M IVd5ed/WLl0pAsgHZExvu5RzyxOYK3ZHX8oHXTLoSu+12F9IqCW1GpGxIo+oavp9bfxt B8r3PjfG8EgL3wxo3SkO3DY4XfI5vbQsGoTmJGIRS9gPAJvsljTena8KFDIVs1eEJiB4 cNfuaVsYzLDJsN3Mh+qFVNQgWQ6fJ9ybKqSa30jyCc+rOa3Oi4+U3G3wSXul8BacIeQY x7a2T4oWAjtMimloYKHnEYTL7PPY2Bu8bU0gM3X1AKwCk/hk0uWbBuDY0N0ntPA42FTj rdCg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=svfQ7HzkgP4B6UmFmV8pZXEtOn+P+bd+5mbd7e7zoBg=; b=JoXzUdLyIQxtSIIJ//dzLRGXwSo2RmlPsLcYYPKgd0DqOQKA2wF4bYc9iOuMdQHAnO bW2z3EnhMVrvuQmtkWQDWvBPE6Arc5W4GZR3Q5AWo9gPM3kkc4l/XCRu6EGhsUYbasG6 zkVb8AlCxPefmGipaO4Qw8qFuhL3S1yiKuFNg/oTcPIVPR6Fc8eRZoEtj1LZJ0P164GP WIPBD3Fy/m8UlHkcu98fU/ZvVH8CbJ/H5U+iuOBIQ6S4SGnu0KuvcG2BWj7b4Ocf6coP I0t/wepJ139FT+uJttryQoAbsHj+K14L56/2PN4A4M1fCHI0330QZ0Ogag5ORyEMVnst Lr1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUeEYbxMn3SvMXWL+5BRr8j4D0yR9Vmqr36pyqb1UizsuI9pEpx BCCdIaxmgZdyrmIjGxI5Q8DS6oTV
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyzLTETibpbE6uyFYfyARBVItpnZompiZQLiH5qtfzKZAgiCCHId4YyMO8F5i6VkeC/whYluQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:e508:: with SMTP id n8mr9927957pff.199.1568061650356; Mon, 09 Sep 2019 13:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] (82.206.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.206.82]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u10sm4586438pfm.71.2019.09.09.13.40.47 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Sep 2019 13:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
To: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>, Joel Halpern <joel.halpern@ericsson.com>, "draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
References: <156751558566.9632.10416223948753711891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7bfbaf5fa12c4a9bac3e46ece5dfdcde@boeing.com> <0BF34BFA-5F30-4EE1-9F5E-18D9ECA8D424@gmail.com> <CALx6S37xhhS5ezhJu6-HQmftwY9cBzuCxeaW9thTbKBa2hizcw@mail.gmail.com> <A8A10E03-6EEC-4F60-A213-7D66084BA754@gmail.com> <09d0dc428430407f8154f40d47a417dc@boeing.com> <67823455-8FCB-4C9E-8B78-41F2E99BDC21@employees.org> <1f5edd49236649929599820764dedb4e@boeing.com> <D80F747F-6F23-45C9-AE8B-5C059C5AC8DE@employees.org> <47aafc6dbef24b2ba76b81f95dbbedcb@boeing.com> <4461d66b-797c-4a14-b721-b6089221f1e1@si6networks.com> <CALx6S34hZX+OdT5yyw3Jh-iHZ3mRNsFuHXsaZnpZHevGaGifrg@mail.gmail.com> <86BA423E-AB96-44E1-9D3D-A792450F8563@gmail.com> <B0DA91E4-867A-424E-BB70-D1C5DF939AAE@strayalpha.com> <f8b2e7e6-e73b-bf90-6fe5-fe18e5a206f0@gmail.com> <3F248D34-9A3D-44AB-811D-CA025D15B818@strayalpha.com> <3450c11e-9127-edf1-f889-11fc61dab1de@gmail.com> <446A945A-7C1E-407D-9F78-198BB5106796@strayalpha.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <da177dd1-a025-788b-ef21-51160a996e35@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 08:40:47 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <446A945A-7C1E-407D-9F78-198BB5106796@strayalpha.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/zNLsj_3XFbcyOsJ1IyauYPz814E>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 20:40:54 -0000

On 09-Sep-19 16:11, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Sep 8, 2019, at 8:50 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 09-Sep-19 12:15, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sep 8, 2019, at 1:26 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wouldn't that require the middle box to become an architectural element?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but not just “an” (one):
>>>>>
>>>>> Touch, J: Middlebox Models Compatible with the Internet. USC/ISI (ISI-TR-711), 2016. (Type: Technical Report | Links | BibTeX)
>>>>>
>>>>>  * https://www.strayalpha.com/pubs/isi-tr-711.pdf
>>>>
>>>> I'll take the liberty of pointing out that we've known for many years that
>>>> there are multiple types of middleboxes and they have multiple facets:
>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3234
>>>
>>> Facets are just properties. That doc makes no attempt to describe them as architectural roles.
>>
>> Agreed. My point is that the issue has been lying on the IETF table for many years, and we've collectively chosen to ignore it.
> 
> By “we”, I’m not sure who you mean. There have been plenty of us complaining about this gap for a very long time in the IETF.

Yes, but the IAB hasn't really taken up the issue and we haven't ever had a WG that seriously tackled it, IMHO.

> 
>>
>>>>
>>>> So far, we haven't added them to any formal architectural description of
>>>> the Internet, probably because we don't have one.
>>>
>>> RFC1122, RFC1123, RFC1812 as standards.
>>>
>>> I (and IMO those RFCs) disagree with the position you took in RFC1958, FWIW.
>>
>> "you" = the IAB in 1996; I was only the document editor.
> 
> Fair point, but presumably you were on the IAB at the time?

Yes indeed. But although it's almost my most-cited RFC, I don't deserve sole credit or sole blame.

> 
>> But IMHO those RFCs are not architectural as such. They describe functions of nodes, not how the nodes work together as a system.
> 
> An architecture is (IMO) the behavior of a system that is the consequence of the behavior of its components and the ways in which they interact.
> 
> Arguably, those RFCs - adding 791 and 3819, and a few others, do exactly that. In a nutshell: routers relay; subnets (as links) interconnect), and hosts source, sink, and do the rest (including reliability), all based on globally-unique addresses in that can be aggregated by bit prefix. No, there’s no “roadmap” doc that provides the top-level description, but the rest is definitely there in those and other docs.

Yes, we agree about that. It's the roadmap that is missing.

> IMO, the issue is that middleboxes can’t simply be added to that list consistently - they aren’t a third thing that can be peers to routers or hosts. There is a way to describe them that’s consistent, though - but only if they are different elements when viewed from different points in the network (as I described in the tech report).

I can't disagree.

   Brian
> 
> Joe